I can offend people pretty easily. All I have to do is talk politics. Here goes...
The 1917 Espionage Act was the first significant anti-free speech statute in the United States to be challenged in court. The Republican Supreme Court upheld numerous cases of censorship as it related to opposing the Great World War, from anti-war pamphlets to advertisements opposing the draft. They called opposing war the equivalent of 'yelling fire in a crowded theater' and sent many people to prison for years.
In those days traditional liberal groups like ACLU and National Lawyers Guild fought to keep free speech.
It wasn't until the late 1960's under a Democratic Supreme Court that these early and severe anti-free speech cases were overturned, and we were permitted some of our free speech back again.
Today, free speech is being assaulted on all sides, with each blaming the other.
Some Democrats want to have notorious 'safe spaces,' which would be fine, but they don't realize that they need to go to the safe space and not have the safe space come to them.
Some Republicans want to have total monopolization of free speech by declaring corporations Constitutional 'persons' with free speech rights, or allowing deregulated conglomerates to buy up all the free speech space and control it. Ironically, even the ACLU has bought into some of these views.
In 2010, the same year of the notorious Citizens United corporate electioneering case, the Supreme Court also upheld the "material support" law by a 6-3 vote with all Republicans voting to make free speech illegal, and all Democrats against it. They reasoned that talking to groups on the 'terrorism list' would give them credibility, even if you told them to give up terrorism! Crazy stuff. Jimmy Carter himself was outraged at this decision.
As for me, I think speech should remain virtually unregulated, but that large conglomerates should not be allowed to hog up all the space. That would be nice.
view the rest of the comments →
flyawayhigh ago
I can offend people pretty easily. All I have to do is talk politics. Here goes...
The 1917 Espionage Act was the first significant anti-free speech statute in the United States to be challenged in court. The Republican Supreme Court upheld numerous cases of censorship as it related to opposing the Great World War, from anti-war pamphlets to advertisements opposing the draft. They called opposing war the equivalent of 'yelling fire in a crowded theater' and sent many people to prison for years.
In those days traditional liberal groups like ACLU and National Lawyers Guild fought to keep free speech.
It wasn't until the late 1960's under a Democratic Supreme Court that these early and severe anti-free speech cases were overturned, and we were permitted some of our free speech back again.
Today, free speech is being assaulted on all sides, with each blaming the other.
Some Democrats want to have notorious 'safe spaces,' which would be fine, but they don't realize that they need to go to the safe space and not have the safe space come to them.
Some Republicans want to have total monopolization of free speech by declaring corporations Constitutional 'persons' with free speech rights, or allowing deregulated conglomerates to buy up all the free speech space and control it. Ironically, even the ACLU has bought into some of these views.
In 2010, the same year of the notorious Citizens United corporate electioneering case, the Supreme Court also upheld the "material support" law by a 6-3 vote with all Republicans voting to make free speech illegal, and all Democrats against it. They reasoned that talking to groups on the 'terrorism list' would give them credibility, even if you told them to give up terrorism! Crazy stuff. Jimmy Carter himself was outraged at this decision.
As for me, I think speech should remain virtually unregulated, but that large conglomerates should not be allowed to hog up all the space. That would be nice.